Unsettling Pedagogy: Co-designing Research in Place with Indigenous Educators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article argues that decolonizing educational research begins in attention to inherited colonial thinking and ways of being. Working with over 250 Indigenous educators, staff, students, faculty and administrators associated with 10 partner universities in Ontario, Canada, we co-designed a questionnaire assessing how Ontario post-secondary students are learning to think about colonialism and its relationship to Indigenous peoples and Canadian society. Situating ourselves as researchers and as participants, we theorize the questionnaire’s and our own methodological transformation through the lens of recent literature on epistemologies of ignorance, discussing humour, the relationship between language and imagination, and assumptions we held that presented significant opportunities to shift how we relate. In doing so we argue the social importance of attending to the limits of knowledge and the entrenchment of those limits in historically conditioned and socially sanctioned axes of dominance. We attest both to the depths of colonial misrecognition and to the power of Indigenous knowledge and ways of being to shift social worlds.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.168 | 0.128 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".